Crime: Rape

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What guidelines on the issue of dishonesty are now being provided to police forces investigating allegations of rape.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Guidance for the police on investigating serious sexual offences, including rape, published by the National Centre for Policing Excellence in 2005, sets out the principles for investigative interviewing, including the use of bad character evidence where the suspect has a propensity to be untruthful. The guidance also advises officers to work on the premise that victim reports are accurate unless the victim informs them otherwise or unless an officer uncovers information that contradicts the victim's account. Where there is evidence that a complaint is false, the CPS should consider whether the person who made the allegation should be charged with wasting police time or perverting the course of justice.

Crime: Rape

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will review the extent to which the code of practice governing the conduct of identity parades is adhered to, in the light of the investigation of the case of Warren Blackwell and allegations of rape made against him; and
	Whether they will review the extent to which the evidence gathered during the conduct of identity parades is admissible as reliable evidence at trial, in the light of evidence gathered in the case of Warren Blackwell.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: It is a matter for the chief officer of police for the force area concerned to ensure that police officers and police staff comply with relevant statutory provisions. The status given to evidence gathered during an investigation is a matter for the court. The Code of Practice on the Identification of Persons (Code D) is issued under Section 66(1)(b) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). The code is subject to ongoing review in the light of legislative change, case law and learning from operational practice.

Demonstrations: "Sack Parliament"

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many arrests and how many convictions were made in connection with the "Sack Parliament" demonstration on 9 October; under which Acts such arrests and convictions were made; and whether prior permission for the demonstration was sought.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police tells me that approximately 300 demonstrators were present in the Westminster area on 9 October, with over 100 hard-line activists converging on Parliament Square. During the demonstration, there was a concerted push against police lines as part of an attempt to get into the Palace of Westminster through Carriage Gates.
	A total of 38 arrests were made and an additional 40 people were reported for offences and will be issued with summons to attend court. The main offences committed were organising or participating in an unauthorised demonstration; breach of the peace; possession of an offensive weapon; and possession of controlled drugs. These cases have not yet reached trial.
	The demonstrators did not notify police of their intention to demonstrate as required by the provisions of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.

Demonstrations: Definition

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	For the purposes of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, what is their definition of demonstration and what is the statutory basis for that definition; and, for the purposes of Section 134 of the Act, what degree of risk is necessary before a condition may be imposed restricting the right to freedom of speech.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Sections 132 to 138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 deal with demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament and provide that all such demonstrations must be authorised in advance by the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. There is no statutory definition of demonstration. This is a matter for the courts, which will give the word its normal, everyday meaning.
	The commissioner may attach conditions to a demonstration for the purpose of preventing hindrance to any person wishing to enter or leave the Palace of Westminster; hindrance to the proper operation of Parliament; serious public disorder; serious damage to property; disruption to the life of the community; a security risk in any part of the designated area; or risk to the safety of members of the public, including those taking part in the demonstration. The senior police officer at the scene may impose additional conditions. All conditions must be necessary and proportionate, taking into account human rights considerations.

Health: Personal Medical Records

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In what circumstances confidentiality of personal medical records will be breached on grounds of serious crime and national security.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: I understand from my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Health that the common law of confidentiality limits the circumstances in which personal health information can be disclosed without the consent of the patient concerned. Breaches are allowed where there is a mandatory statutory obligation to do so or where an overriding public interest exists. The Department of Health has issued guidance (Confidentiality: NHS Code of Practice), which advises that public interest disclosures should be made only where it is necessary to help to investigate or prevent serious crime, e.g. child abuse, murder or rape. A copy of this guidance is available in the Library.
	A number of statutes also impose a duty to disclose personal health information in certain circumstances. The Terrorism Act 2000 (Section 19) places a statutory obligation on health professionals to disclose relevant personal health information where they believe an offence under the Act has been committed. In addition, where information is disclosed to the Serious Organised Crime Agency under the guidance described above, the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (Section 34) exempts disclosure made to the agency from any obligations of confidentiality.

Israel and Palestine: Checkpoints

Lord Dykes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have had any contacts with Mrs Judith Keshet, co-founder in Israel of Checkpoint Watch, to discuss daily problems of harassment for Palestinians passing through Israeli checkpoints in the Palestinian territories.

Lord Triesman: Our embassy in Tel Aviv has frequent contact with members of Checkpoint Watch. We support their work and have assisted with projects in the past. We continue to urge both the Palestinians and the Israelis to honour their agreement on access and movement in the Occupied Territories. We last raised our concerns with the Israeli authorities on 1 November.

Israel and Palestine: Peace Process

Lord Dykes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, following the Prime Minister's comments made at the Lord Mayor's banquet on 13 November, they will propose a meeting between the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of the Palestinian Authority to discuss peace issues.

Lord Triesman: The UK believes that an early meeting between Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas is desirable and stands ready to offer both parties support. When my right honourable friend the Prime Minister visited Israel and the Occupied Territories from 9 to 11 September, both Prime Minster Olmert and President Abbas agreed to meet each other without conditions and made clear their commitment to a political process.

Israel and Palestine: West Bank

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many times they have asked the Government of Israel to cease the expansion of settlements in the West Bank during the past six months; and with what results.

Lord Triesman: The UK has consistently raised with the Government of Israel its opposition to settlements in the Occupied Territories over the past six months. We have continued to call for Israel to implement its commitments under the first phase of the road map, including freezing all settlement activity, and to dismantle settlement outposts established since March 2001. We most recently raised this issue with the Israeli authorities on 15 November.

Sport: National Debate

Lord Luke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the proposed terms and conditions for the national debate on sport and fitness announced by the Chancellor of Exchequer on 25 October.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Work to develop a new strategy for physical activity and fitness is being taking forward across government by the Inter-Ministerial Group on Physical Activity. The group is chaired by Caroline Flint, Public Health Minister, and reports to both the Secretary of State for Health and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.

Sport: National Debate

Lord Luke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Minister for Sport, Mr Richard Caborn, was not chosen to be one of the four Ministers in charge of the national debate on sport and fitness launched on 25 October.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The department's interests in this debate will be represented by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. However, Richard Caborn as Minister for Sport will also have a key role to play in any national debate on sport and fitness.

Sudan: UN Resolutions

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Given their role in securing United Nations Security Council Resolution 1706, what pressure they are exerting in their relationship with the Government of Sudan to ensure that the resolution is implemented.

Lord Triesman: The Government were at the forefront of the international campaign to persuade the Government of Sudan to fully implement UN Security Council Resolution 1706. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary and I raised the matter repeatedly with foreign counterparts, and my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for International Development travelled to Khartoum on 16 October to press President Bashir in person. However, the Sudanese Government have remained obdurate.
	In order to break the political impasse, the UN and the African Union (AU) brokered an agreement on a viable alternative between the international community and the Government of Sudan. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for International Development attended this meeting for the UK. The agreement provides for a renewed ceasefire; more and better-resourced troops on the ground, reporting jointly to the UN and AU; and a renewed political process. The Sudanese Government now need to show their commitment to peace by accepting this agreement.
	The UK will keep up the pressure on the Government of Sudan to implement the commitments that they have made and to agree the outstanding issues of exact troop numbers and reporting lines for the mission. We are encouraging other Governments to do the same.

Sudan: UN Resolutions

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether inviting the head of the Sudanese intelligence services, Salah Abdallah Gosh, to the United Kingdom to hold talks with the Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Jendayi Frazer, in March and September 2006, contributed to exerting pressure on the Government of Sudan to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1706.

Lord Triesman: General Salah Abdallah Gosh applied to visit the UK for urgent medical treatment on two separate occasions. He was granted single-entry visas to travel in March and August this year. While he was here, UK officials took the opportunity to raise the issue of Darfur with him. He is an influential member of the Sudanese Government and it therefore makes sense to raise matters of concern with him. At present he is not subject to any UN or EU sanctions or travel restrictions.
	Meetings between US and Sudanese officials are a matter for the US and Sudanese Governments.

Sudan: UN Resolutions

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Given that the Government of Sudan have thus far failed to implement the comprehensive peace agreement and the Darfur peace agreement as well as mandatory United Nations Security Council resolutions, and given their recently reinforced military campaign in Darfur, on what basis they claim that the Government of Sudan make a trustworthy partner in peace and are a credible signatory to the Darfur peace agreement.

Lord Triesman: Some progress has been made on implementing the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA). However, implementation needs to be accelerated. We are pressing both sides to overcome the main obstacles to this, including resolution of the Abyei boundary and the oil commission.
	Any progress on the CPA risks being unravelled by the ongoing crisis in Darfur. There have been far too many unfulfilled promises from all sides to the Darfur conflict. The international community cannot stand by and allow this appalling situation to continue.
	The UK has been at the forefront of efforts to help to find a lasting solution to the Darfur crisis. This will be achieved only through a political process to which all sides are committed. We welcome the agreement reached in Addis Ababa on 16 November. This will allow for more and better-resourced peacekeeping troops on the ground and for a renewed political process for Darfur.
	We will keep up the pressure on the Government of Sudan and the rebel movements to fulfil their commitments on Darfur. We will also continue to press the Government of Sudan to speed up implementation of the CPA and the eastern Sudan peace agreement for the rest of Sudan. These political processes offer the best hope for peace across Sudan.

Sudan: UN Resolutions

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they intend to respond if the Government of Sudan fail to fulfil their commitment to and obligations under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1556 to disarm the Janjaweed within two months.

Lord Triesman: It is unacceptable that the Government of Sudan have not done more to carry out their obligations under United Nations Security Council Resolution (SCR) 1556, which was passed in July 2004, and subsequent SCRs to disarm the Janjaweed. The disarmament of the Janjaweed became a key part of the security arrangements contained in the Darfur peace agreement (DPA), which the Government of Sudan signed in May this year. However, the Government of Sudan have failed to honour their commitment. Together with our international partners, we have raised the issue repeatedly with the Sudanese Government and at the joint commission, the body responsible for overseeing implementation of the security arrangements set out in the DPA. We will continue to do so until the Government of Sudan take their obligations seriously.

Sudan: Women

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they will take to assist the African Union in protecting women against sexual attack in and around camps for internally displaced people; and whether they will make representations to the Government of Sudan to implement the reform necessary to ensure that legal recourse is available to women.

Lord Triesman: Women in Darfur are highly vulnerable to sexual attack in and around camps for internally displaced people (IDPs). This is totally unacceptable. We have supported the African Union in providing patrols for women leaving the IDP camps in search of firewood and have urged it to resume these patrols when they have been cut.
	The Darfur peace agreement (DPA) calls for Government of Sudan police and the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) police to work together to investigate all crimes against women, with specialist gender units and women police personnel. We have made it absolutely clear to the Government of Sudan that they must accept and implement the agreement and work with AMIS to protect civilians.

Terrorism

Lord Dykes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What response they will give to the warnings by Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller on 10 November to examine the causes of Islamic terrorist behaviour as well as the symptoms and acts of terrorism.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government are currently undertaking a review of the UK's counterterrorist capability and resources, led by the Home Secretary, which will enable the delivery of a step change in the approach to tackling terrorism over the next decade.

Vehicles: Weight Restrictions

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 2 November (WA 74) (a) when the fixed penalty for ignoring weight restrictions imposed by local traffic regulation order was set at £30; and (b) why, bearing in mind that there is a fixed penalty procedures working group, this amount has not been raised in line with inflation.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: (a) Contravention of a weight restriction imposed by a local traffic regulation order carries the standard fixed penalty for a non-endurable offence. This was increased from £20 to £30 on 1 November 2000.
	(b) The penalty levels associated with all fixed penalty offences are kept under review by the Home Office-chaired fixed penalty procedures working group.
	In reviewing the level of fixed penalties, the group takes account of many different factors. Inflation is only one of these. Others include the importance of traffic control and road safety, the overall fixed penalty structure and effect of any changes in government policy, the level of court-imposed fines for the same offences, the impact on low-income groups, and the need to set penalties at levels that offenders will pay without contesting but which will also act as a deterrent. To date, the group has not considered that there is a sufficiently strong case to recommend to Ministers an increase in the fixed penalty level.

Zimbabwe: Sanctions

Baroness D'Souza: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will press for a renewal in February 2007 of the current sanctions against official and personal travel first imposed on President Mugabe and 19 of his senior associates by the European Union in February 2002.

Lord Triesman: As I told the House on 19 October, targeted measures against 126 leading figures in the Zimbabwe Government must continue (Official Report, cols. 916-20). They place real and significant pressure on the regime. They have the support of the Zimbabwean political opposition and non-governmental organisations, and they send a firm message that the EU is concerned about human rights abuses. As Mugabe continues to ignore international calls for reform, instead punishing his people for voicing their concerns, we will continue to push for the targeted measures to be maintained.

Zimbabwe: UN Resolution

Baroness D'Souza: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in collaboration with their international partners, they will promote and support a resolution on Zimbabwe at the United Nations Human Rights Council to endorse the resolution passed by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights during its 38th session in 2005.

Lord Triesman: The next session of the Human Rights Council (HRC) will focus on its institution-building agenda, working to make the council fully operational as quickly as possible, and we do not expect specific resolutions on country situations or thematic human rights issues at this session. But the Government take every opportunity to raise their concerns about the continued abuse of fundamental human rights by the Government of Zimbabwe. At our instigation, the EU presidency raised the issue of Zimbabwe at the HRC in September with the special rapporteurs on internally displaced persons and adequate housing. The EU also included a strong reference to the human rights situation in Zimbabwe in its general statement to the United Nations General Assembly in October.
	We welcomed the resolution by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights and lobbied African partners to adopt it at the African Union summit in July. We will continue to review with partners appropriate fora to discuss Zimbabwe's dire human rights record.